Should the Gospel of John be removed from the Bible?

[Lambano]

I also don't have a problem with the author invoking the personified Logos. Since John 1:1-5 echoes the personified Wisdom of Proverbs 8, and since Philo of Alexandria was himself Jewish, this is within the perimeter of contemporary Jewish thought.

 

[Wick Stick]

Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its support.

I agree, but...

Not all the books in the accepted canon will pass that test. Can you live with that?

 

[Wick Stick]

I also don't have a problem with the author invoking the personified Logos. Since John 1:1-5 echoes the personified Wisdom of Proverbs 8, and since Philo of Alexandria was himself Jewish, this is within the perimeter of contemporary Jewish thought.

I have a problem there. The personification of Wisdom may be Jewish, but it's at odds with the rest of the Bible.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Not all the books in the accepted canon will pass that test. Can you live with that?

If that were actually true, then that is claiming the Lord failed to control what went in to His Canon.

I've run across numerous people that claimed the Lord just couldn't cut the mustard.

Obviously the devil is speaking thru these people.

 

[Wick Stick]

If that were actually true, then that is claiming the Lord failed to control what went in to His Canon.

I've run across numerous people that claimed the Lord just couldn't cut the mustard.

Obviously the devil is speaking thru these people.

Meh... canonicity is a doctrine of men

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Meh... canonicity is a doctrine of men

Yep, some folks believe it's not possible to know what God says or doesn't say.

So they turn away from the Lord and go do drugs and get drunk! It's a real shame they'll go to hell too.

 

[Wick Stick]

Yep, some folks believe it's not possible to know what God says or doesn't say.

So they turn away from the Lord and go do drugs and get drunk! It's a real shame they'll go to hell too.

Oh it's possible... it's not even difficult. The parts that say "thus saith the Lord" or "the Word of the Lord came to..." are authentic. THe people ascribing inspiration to other parts are in error.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

The parts that say "thus saith the Lord" or "the Word of the Lord came to..." are authentic.

OK so we're back to claiming the Lord failed to control what went in to His Canon.

That's false doctrine and cherry picking leads to more false doctrine.

This explains some of the goofy stuff you post. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Wick Stick]

OK so we're back to claiming the Lord failed to control what went in to His Canon.

That's false doctrine and cherry picking leads to more false doctrine.

This explains some of the goofy stuff you post. Thanks for sharing.

So... I believe the Bible is true in what it claims is inspired or not... and you believe... what exactly?

 

[Lambano]

I have a problem there. The personification of Wisdom may be Jewish, but it's at odds with the rest of the Bible.

Wait; you’re taking the position that chapter 8 should be removed from Proverbs?

*snip*

 

[MatthewG]

I tell you what (hank hill voice), if you read that bible and start hating people, then you might need to re-evaluate your relationship with Yahavah/God.

 

[Lambano]

OK so we're back to claiming the Lord failed to control what went in to His Canon.

That's false doctrine and cherry picking leads to more false doctrine.

Unless the doctrine of Verbal Plenary Inspiration is itself a false doctrine that has led to more false doctrine.

 

[Brakelite]

I agree, but...

Not all the books in the accepted canon will pass that test. Can you live with that?

I haven't read one book in scripture that doesn't point to Christ as Creator, Saviour, and Lord. That's good enough for me.

As for "thus sayeth the Lord", it isn't the Bible that is the problem or the issue. It's our unbelief. Not everyone, despite claims to the contrary, actually believe what the scripture says. And in order to compensate, they make stuff up so the truth of scripture doesn't hurt so much.

 

[Wick Stick]

Wait; you’re taking the position that chapter 8 should be removed from Proverbs?

*snip*

Worse - I'm taking the position that the whole book of Proverbs is not inspired.

We know this because
(a) the book itself doesn't claim to be inspired
(b) the book's author is not a prophet

While we're at it, the book's author was also not counted among the faithful...

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

you believe... what exactly?

I believe based on your previous posts that you don't accept the whole counsel of God.

Because you said "The parts that say "thus saith the Lord" or "the Word of the Lord came to..." are authentic"

This leads people to think that you are saying the rest of scripture is not "authentic"

is inspired or not

More indication you don't believe all of God's Word.

God says it's ALL inspired so there is no question that ALL of God's Word is actually true and "authentic"

I'm taking the position that the whole book of Proverbs is not inspired.

That's the same thing the devil says! Wow!

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[Wick Stick]

I believe based on your previous posts that you don't accept the whole counsel of God.

Because you said "The parts that say "thus saith the Lord" or "the Word of the Lord came to..." are authentic"

This leads people to think that you are saying the rest of scripture is not "authentic"

"Authentic" was probably a poor word choice on my part. But I am saying that not everything that's been canonized as part of the Bible is inspired.

Ironically, my source for that is the Bible.

More indication you don't believe all of God's Word.

I don't believe it's all inspired and flawless.

It's probably worth noting that something doesn't have to be inspired to be correct. We were discussing Proverbs earlier... there's plenty of good stuff in Proverbs, even if it isn't an inspired book.

God says it's ALL inspired so there is no question that ALL of God's Word is actually true and "authentic"

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Yep, you've got that one verse, plucked out-of-context and of doubtful translation. Can you show me a chapter or book other than this single verse that teaches the same?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

not everything that's been canonized as part of the Bible is inspired.

God inspired things to be put in that others did as an example of what NOT to do

None the less God is the One Who decided what would be put in to His Canon

Proverbs earlier... there's plenty of good stuff in Proverbs, even if it isn't an inspired book.

That's God's Wisdom in Proverbs, feel free to believe it came from the devil. That is error

God said ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness whether you agree with Him or not.

plucked out-of-context and of doubtful translation

Enjoy your fellowship with devils.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

John 5:2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.

The pool of Bethesda was destroyed in 70AD, which places its composition prior to 70AD not 90-110AD.

not if he was speaking or writing of events which happened before 70 AD

 

[grafted branch]

not if he was speaking or writing of events which happened before 70 AD

How would it look if some wrote an article today, to the people in the US, and started off by saying “Now there is in New York City twin towers, which are part of the World Trade Center”?

 

[Lambano]

Worse - I'm taking the position that the whole book of Proverbs is not inspired.

We know this because
(a) the book itself doesn't claim to be inspired
(b) the book's author is not a prophet

While we're at it, the book's author was also not counted among the faithful...

Now, there are those who claim that the choice to include (or not include ) certain books in the canon was itself inspired by God.

Now, Luther objected to the choice to include James. I hear Revelation was controversial. Marcion objected to anything not written by Paul. The Catholics at Trent included the apocrypha. And somebody here once made a pitch to include Spurgeon’s Evening and Morning devotional in the canon. It takes all kinds to make a world.